Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Microsoft Windows

Windows 7 RTM Reviewed & Benchmarked 792

Posted by kdawson
from the praising-with-faint-damns dept.
An anonymous reader writes "The code is final, and CNet has reviewed the final version of Windows 7, with benchmarks to support the case that it's not only the fastest version of Windows to shut down, but also looks like 'the operating system that both Microsoft and its consumers have been waiting for.' The review continues: 'By fixing most of the perceived and real problems in Vista, Microsoft has laid the groundwork for the future of where Windows will go. Windows 7 presents a stable platform that can compete comfortably with OS X, while reassuring the world that Microsoft can still turn out a strong, useful operating system.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Windows 7 RTM Reviewed & Benchmarked

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 05, 2009 @01:53AM (#28952317)

    Pull the plug!

    Seriously.... they claimed all this same stuff for vista. and we all found out they were full of crap.

    7 might be better than vista. but i still dont believe it's the fastest ever or any of their other bs.

    This isn't news. it's an ad.

    • by symbolset (646467) on Wednesday August 05, 2009 @02:02AM (#28952349) Journal

      From installation to wipe in an average of ten days. A pioneering achievement.

      As for the rest of this prerelease hype, I'll believe it when I see it.

    • by sopssa (1498795) * <sopssa@email.com> on Wednesday August 05, 2009 @02:09AM (#28952411) Journal

      Pull the plug!

      Seriously.... they claimed all this same stuff for vista. and we all found out they were full of crap.

      7 might be better than vista. but i still dont believe it's the fastest ever or any of their other bs.

      This isn't news. it's an ad.

      You might like to actually test it, people have been telling good things about Windows 7, and the interface and updates do look quite nice. Personally I'm using Vista as I never bothered to replace it with XP, so I should notice it even more.

      Judging from the article and what I've read before, they've spend time on making sure interface and the system responsiveness improves a lot. That is what people usually consider as "fast", even if its fake-fast it looks faster. Its pretty much the only thing OS can do to appear faster anyways - You cant magically get more CPU power.

      • by kamikaez (1202329) on Wednesday August 05, 2009 @05:50AM (#28954033)

        You might like to actually test it, people have been telling good things about Windows 7, and the interface and updates do look quite nice.

        You missed the point! CNet and PC World seems to be very much just reproducing Microsoft's marketing material, just like they did when Vista came out.
        And the benchmarks doesn't prove anything, if you ignore shutdown time, it looks to be slower overall then xp AND Vista..

        And since Vista came out, both Linux and OS X have improved tremendously when it comes to performance and boot times.
        Is Snow Leopard mentioned anywhere or compared to earlier OS X versions + all the Windows versions? NO..

        Sincerely yours,
        Vista 64bit user

      • by Twinbee (767046)

        Hardly 'fake' imo. 'Invisible' latencies (say 0 - 0.5s) are anything but if you look out for them. Even if you don't, they play on the subconscious like a dripping tap.

        One day, button mouse down will activate buttons and other GUI widgets. That in itself feels much nicer than waiting for the LMB to be released. Chrome uses this for its tabs, and it's so much nicer.

    • by Anubis IV (1279820) on Wednesday August 05, 2009 @02:30AM (#28952579)
      Having not read the article, I do have to say I find it rather humorous that the shutdown benchmark is the one that was cited. To me, that seems like a sort of implicit admission that shutting down is something that will need to be done frequently, though I'm sure that wasn't the intention. Looking at my current uptime, I'm at just under a month up and running right now (on my non-Windows OS), and I haven't been making any special attempt to stay up more than I regularly would...I just haven't had a reason to shut down in that period. Is shutting down quickly something that really matters that much to "normal" people?
      • by karstux (681641) on Wednesday August 05, 2009 @03:38AM (#28953039) Homepage

        I like to conserve energy, so I don't leave my PC running when I'm not using it. I also don't use "standby", it's a useless power draw. When the PC is off, I physically separate it (and all the periphery) from the grid - so I do have to wait until shutdown is complete.

        Hence, like booting up, shutting down is something I do once or twice a day, and it's comfortable to have it out of the way as quickly as possible so I don't have to sit around twiddling my thumbs.

    • by smash (1351) on Wednesday August 05, 2009 @02:31AM (#28952583) Homepage Journal
      Benchmarks might not indicate it to be fastest, but it sure FEELS fast in general use.

      This is one thing benchmarks unfortunately do not show, but is where Windows 7 (and FreeBSD as well) excel - responsiveness.

      On a modern multitasking machine, I (for one) don't care so much if a task takes a little longer to complete in the background so long as I can carry on working in the foreground.

      7 Multitasks better than any previous Windows OS bar none, and I think this is why it "feels" faster. It responds to user input a lot better.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by edcheevy (1160545)
        For the anecdotal record, I installed the RC on my ye olde underpowered XP laptop (512 MB RAM) and with the bare bones, stripped down setup it runs about the same as it did using XP. If nothing else, the fact that I've left it on for 3 months underscores my lack of desire to return to XP.
    • by mdwh2 (535323) on Wednesday August 05, 2009 @08:56AM (#28955695) Journal

      This isn't news. it's an ad.

      Wait - a review of the finished latest release of the most dominant OS on the planet, from the biggest software company in the world, isn't news? Yet the daily stories we get of every possible random rumour about the Iphone and the "[do mundane activity] On Your Iphone!" stories we get aren't advertising?

  • Great goals (Score:5, Insightful)

    by icebike (68054) on Wednesday August 05, 2009 @01:59AM (#28952335)

    > fastest version of Windows to shut down,

    Was that ever a problem? start shut down, and turn out the lights, It will be down when you come back in the morning.

    How about boot up time?

    • by Verminator (559609) on Wednesday August 05, 2009 @02:03AM (#28952357)
      As the most useful thing any user can do with Windows is to shut it down, this is a critical benchmark of performance.
      • by electrosoccertux (874415) on Wednesday August 05, 2009 @02:16AM (#28952491)

        Shutting down is part of the restart process, which I personally do several times a day just to make sure everything is running A-OK!!!

    • Re:Great goals (Score:5, Insightful)

      by 0123456 (636235) on Wednesday August 05, 2009 @02:34AM (#28952605)

      > fastest version of Windows to shut down,

      Was that ever a problem? start shut down, and turn out the lights, It will be down when you come back in the morning.

      If only...

      Far more likely it will be sitting there saying 'StupidTaskbarApp.exe did not shut down. Press 'OK' to close this application' or some similar shit.

      One of the reasons I hate Windows so much is that I can't even rely on the piece of crap OS to shut down if I tell it to shut down and then walk away. It literally expects me to sit there for up to five minutes while it 'saves my settings' and stops all the processes to ensure the bloody thing turns itself off.

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by BikeHelmet (1437881)

        You should look into nLite [nliteos.com]. It might help you out - there's a setting there that can terminate anything that refuses to shut down within 5-10 seconds.

        nLite lets you customize your WinXP ISO.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Dare nMc (468959)

      XP shutdown actually destroyed my laptop. I hit shutdown, waited a minute to start shutdown, closed the lid and put it into my bag. The next morning I opened the bag and heat was pouring out of the bag, some warning message about serial port still in use or driver failed, but XP had disabled power savings, and it wouldn't shutdown until the only choice "OK" was clicked. How valuable was that dialog? The hard drive didn't work a lick, and the screen was discolored after that.
      With netbooks shutdown time

  • by da_matta (854422) on Wednesday August 05, 2009 @02:03AM (#28952359)
    Hmph.. No comments that even remotely imply having RTFA'd, but sure enough there's an "astroturfing"-tag. Classy..
  • by Mishotaki (957104) on Wednesday August 05, 2009 @02:09AM (#28952409)

    Did they run out of thing to be proud of?

    I sure wouldn't be someone to boast about how fast my OS can shut itself down i'd find something that people actually cares and wait for: booting

    When i shut down my computer, i'm certainly not looking at it and even less timing how long it takes for it to be completely off...

  • by korean.ian (1264578) on Wednesday August 05, 2009 @02:13AM (#28952467)

    "'the operating system that both Microsoft and its consumers have been waiting for.'"
    So it's Snow Leopard?

  • by electrosoccertux (874415) on Wednesday August 05, 2009 @02:14AM (#28952479)

    Just FYI-- the claims of better gaming performance from 7 than Vista or XP have not materialized (not on my machine at least). It's just as slow as Vista.

    That said, it's still worth having (like Vista) with UAC turned off, simply because the aggressive prefetching loads frequently used programs into RAM. Stuff opens faster.

  • Hardware (Score:5, Insightful)

    by rampant mac (561036) on Wednesday August 05, 2009 @02:17AM (#28952499)

    FTFA: "Importantly, it won't require the hardware upgrades that Vista demanded, partially because the hardware has caught up"

    Yes, but how does it do on my old hardware that struggled with Vista in the first place? I know Mac OS 10.1 > 10.2 > 10.3 > 10.4 gave me better performance on the same hardware. It wasn't until I moved to Leopard that I REALLY noticed my PowerBook 1Ghz PPC chip was at it's limit.

  • 16GB? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by reub2000 (705806) on Wednesday August 05, 2009 @02:22AM (#28952535)
    What in a OS could be taking up 16GB for a minimal install?
    • Re:16GB? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Tukz (664339) on Wednesday August 05, 2009 @02:46AM (#28952691) Journal

      My fresh install of Windows 7 RC Ultimate on my old rig, didn't take up 16GB of space. Only about half IIRC.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by ledow (319597)

      I have no idea but it usually just cruft and poor programming... you'll probably find that it only peaks at 16Gb during installation but uses 5-10 Gb for a "final footprint" after the installation is complete. They might even take into account drive formatting, swapfile, etc. into that which will give quite a hit.

      To be honest, the initial install for Windows was always stupidly large for what you got - you can nLite and UPX and do all sorts of stuff and still get a working Windows installation in half the

  • by purpledinoz (573045) on Wednesday August 05, 2009 @02:32AM (#28952599)
    Microsoft should give Vista users a free upgrade to Windows 7. Unfortunately, my laptop doesn't work well with XP, because the drivers are unstable. So I'm stuck using Vista, which is a huge beast, slow, and shitty. Now that Windows 7 is coming out, I would love to use that instead, but I get stomach pains when I think about handing my hard earned money to get what Vista SHOULD have been. Now I wait for the /. crowd to flame me to death me for using windows.
  • by bmo (77928) on Wednesday August 05, 2009 @02:56AM (#28952759)

    Linux is anything from a little single shot Derringer to a 30 mm GAU-8/A Avenger Gatling gun at 4200 rounds per minute.

    OSX is clearly stamped down the side "Desert Eagle point five oh"

    And Windows has "'Replica' written down the side"

    --
    BMO

    • by bmajik (96670) <matt@mattevans.org> on Wednesday August 05, 2009 @04:13AM (#28953307) Homepage Journal

      OSX is clearly stamped down the side "Desert Eagle point five oh"

      That's certainly an apt comparison, since most people that have or want DE50's think they look cool and work really awesome, but have no fucking idea what they're doing when using a gun. They feel this strange sense of smugness about the elite status their choice in firearm has afforded them, perhaps not having any idea that a boring old Casull 454 has more muzzle energy, or that the DE50 is utterly impractical for essentially any worhtwhile endeavour. They know that they spent way more money than other guns cost, but they don't realize that there's always something cheaper that does a better job.

      Yet nothing else seems to have caught and held the affection of hollywood so effectively, so nothing else will suffice for the discriminating individuals that know nothing about firearms or marksmanship --- except that they are better than everyone else at both by virtue of their wise purchase.

      I'm not sure you had any idea how good of an analogy you were making. Bravo! :)

  • by Tumbleweed (3706) * on Wednesday August 05, 2009 @03:16AM (#28952883)

    I'm for _anything_ that gets more people to stop using IE6. :)

  • SMB still sucks (Score:5, Interesting)

    by FranTaylor (164577) on Wednesday August 05, 2009 @03:24AM (#28952935)

    Windows network file service is just as slow and as network-chatty as ever.

    When you compare it to NFS4, it is most miserable. With SMB, the client and server shoot packets at each other all day and barely any data gets transferred. NFS4 will totally saturate my gigabit ethernet and it's almost all data in those packets.

    Microsoft should just embrace NFS4 and drop SMB like a hot potato. It serves noone's interests to have such a crappy file service system in this day and age.

  • by nobodyman (90587) on Wednesday August 05, 2009 @03:50AM (#28953119) Homepage

    Is this article a joke? I clearly see that vista beats Win7 in 3 out of 5 benchmarks, and XP beats Windows 7 in all but one (how can we forget the all-important "shutdown time" benchmark.

    Yet CNet is telling me that *this* is the version of Windows I've been waiting for?

  • by fahrvergnugen (228539) <fahrv@NOSpaM.hotmail.com> on Wednesday August 05, 2009 @10:18AM (#28956959) Homepage

    Reposted with a few slight edits from my own blog a few days ago:

    My poor PC broke. Some of my RAM went bad due to the summer heat, combined and my obstinate refusal to turn the AC on until the temperature in my office is well into the 90's. Fortunately RAM is cheap as hell these days, and I can get twice as much memory for half the price I paid a year ago, so I ordered a full 8GB of replacement memory, as much as my motherboard can handle.

    The problem is that I was running Windows Vista 32bit, which can only address a bit under 4GB of RAM. The only way my Windows computer could use the extra memory I'd purchased would be to re-install a 64-bit version of Windows. But I've already pre-ordered Windows 7 Pro, and it seems silly to install Vista 64-bit now when my copy of Windows 7 will arrive in October. So, over the weekend I got a correctly-checksumming ISO of Windows 7 from The Usual Sources and installed it without a key, giving me 30 days to register. The plan is to just use the rearm trick to tide me over until my legal activation keys come in the mail.

    It took a few hours to get everything installed, but today all my apps and games are back, and my files are copied over. I gotta say, if you're going to run a Windows desktop, this is the way to do it. It's NICE. It feels much snappier than Vista, and while it's got more overhead (and thus runs a bit slower) than XP 64-bit, the UI enhancements make up for it. Since today is apparently a bullet-list day, here's a quick rundown of my favorite things:

    • The taskbar / quicklaunch toolbar / system tray / start menu have all been revamped, and the new way is awesome. The taskbar and the quicklaunch bar have been completely integrated, making the functionality very similar to the OS X Dock. To see the open windows for a running application, just hover your mouse over the icon. IE8 integrates very well with this, showing a preview window for each of the open tabs, regardless of window, and allowing you to switch quickly. It's like mini-expose. All very polished. Right-clicking on a Windows 7-native app, whether it's open or not, gives you a jumplist of recently used items, similar to right-clicking on a systray icon.
    • The icon management in the system tray is much improved. You can banish icons from your sight forever, so annoying applications that refuse to let you remove the icon can be shoved off the desktop. No more company logos cluttering up your screen.
    • IE8 rules. Who'd have thought? The privacy filters let you duplicate the functionality of adblock by importing an XML file, and the accelerator framework lets you do things like hilite text and post it to a blog, or email it to someone, all with a couple of clicks. New pages and tabs are linked in a security jail with their parent and can't work with other tabs/windows, and they're automatically color-coded. I like it a lot.
    • The 'show desktop' hover / button in the bottom right. I HATE not being able to look at the desktop for stray icons or whatnot. Now there's a permanent show desktop button in that little strip of pixels between the system tray and the edge of the screen. Formerly useless real estate has been reclaimed for a good purpose!
    • Vista's sidebar gadgets are now completely free-roaming anywhere on the desktop. This is nice, since I always liked the idea of gadgets but didn't want a whole sidebar. Now I can put them wherever, not worry about putting Windows over them, and just hover over the "show desktop" area on the taskbar to check the weather.
    • Fast fast fast. 64-bit IE is speedy! File copies are speedy! The operating system is speedy! Everything just feels snappy and quick.
    • Libraries - this is really neat, Libraries are consolidated collections of folders that all have the same kind of data. So if C:\photos and d:\photos both contain images, I can make them both part of the photo library, and view it as one folder. What makes this interesting is that I can plug in an external disk o' photos, add it to my Library, and as you

Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed. -- Francis Bacon

Working...